Monday, November 3, 2008
Thoughts on the Election: Jay Williams on fear
The remarkable dance pundits and politicians have performed around the electric third-rail of American politics has been breathtaking. For the allegedly civil, race and religion are only talked about with at the brush of the hand, under a breath, or at the edge of a whirling skirt of inneundo - never directly, for who could admit such a thing!
There is an amazing dynamic at play with racial discussions in american politics and in america at large. Though many people would privately understand that they harbor racist or discriminatory beliefs, this is evidently some condition that most cannot speak publicly about. It is a belief for which one feels they cannot fly a flag, even though it may be unshakable.
Why is that? What makes the racist so scared to speak? Why do they keep it to anonymously sent e-mails and whispers among the obviously like-minded?
The context of existence for so many americans is so homogenous that there is often little real threat that an actual member of the group targeted with whatever discriminatory belief will be around when it is enunciated. And of course, when there is, the hand placed in front of the whispering mouth will be cupped even more tightly than before.
here, my friend Jay Williams - artist and rapper - talks about the role of fear and the unknown on issues of ill-founded hate in this year's presidential campaign.
Other submissions in this series:
-Chris Gibson on whether the election matters
-Dan Evarts' "A Bad Night in Sha'ab"
-Reid Bellon on the symbolism of Obama
-The Nahsville Minx doesn't buy the hype.
-Mom explains her political philosophy
-Teddy Kahn on Dog Sh-t and Competitive Obama-Mania
-S. Thompson on "The Business Party"
-Grandmom's thoughts on how politics play in her world
----
When did "politics as usual" become "hate so casual"?
Senator John McCain, had supporters at his rallies label Barack Obama
as a "terrorist", "socialist" and went so far as to accuse him of
being a "Muslim". Muslim! To insinuate that being a Muslim is somehow
a threat and dangerous is not only insulting, its offensive to every
progressive-minded individual and should not be tolerated. Muslims,
for the most part are peaceful people no different from "us". Its
unfortunate to know as Americans who pride ourselves on diversity and
acceptance, still have to learn what it means to truly accept people
for their differences. Im ashamed that fellow Americans would believe
somehow having a difference in religious practices and culture-
signifies anti-American sentiment. How foolish and ignorant are we?
Have we lost our ability to interpret when fear is being forced upon
us? This fear has spread like a malicious game of "telephone" in the
school yard. Unfairly labeling someone as a "terrorist" and then to
pervert it into tarnishing the Islamic faith is unacceptable.
This fear has spread across all party lines. As one caller into my
favorite progressive talk radio show screamed - "Obama is a Hindu!"
According to her, Hindu tradition leads its followers to destroy and
detest everything American! Again, most Hindu's are peaceful people
without ill intent to anyone, let alone America. Yet, this
mis-information is spread without most news medias and even the
candidates batting an eye. In fact, rather than look directly at this
"Campaign of Fear" and address it, certain candidates would rather
wink at it and wave at their supports knowing the seeds of mistrust
they are planting. Enhanced by post- 9/11 fears, "McCain's army" (I
mean this only for those participating in this campaign of fear. I
have no intention of generalizing an entire group of people as some
people would do so carelessly) has encouraged xenophobia toward anyone
of Arab decent and somehow to include Indians of Hindu faith.
I thought to myself, why not use this platform of running for
President, and political influence to build something bigger than what
seems to be a prolonged ego trip? Why Isn't someone using their
political influence to end this toxic speech at rallies and hate
between other Americans? Why isn't someone really trying to
essentially remove the hyphen from fellow Americans? You know,
Arab-American, African-American, Asian-American. The way to remove
that hyphen is to bring us together and not divide us with the fear
and mistrust. Then I remember looking at each party's convention,
respectively. The RNC was a mostly homogenous group with older and
White participants, the DNC was diverse with all ages, all colors all
there to support a candidate who is trying to bring us together and
not use fear to divide us. A candidate who can run a campaign without
disrespecting groups of people as well as one of the world's most
followed religions. A candidate who can respect all people and include
them in changing a nation into something better.
So, I will be casting my vote for a candidate who's campaign has
echoed far beyond this year's election. Obama has electrified a
movement in America that has young and old alike ready to take action.
He has Black and White, Christian and Muslim ready to build a better
and more perfect union. A better and more perfect America.
There is an amazing dynamic at play with racial discussions in american politics and in america at large. Though many people would privately understand that they harbor racist or discriminatory beliefs, this is evidently some condition that most cannot speak publicly about. It is a belief for which one feels they cannot fly a flag, even though it may be unshakable.
Why is that? What makes the racist so scared to speak? Why do they keep it to anonymously sent e-mails and whispers among the obviously like-minded?
The context of existence for so many americans is so homogenous that there is often little real threat that an actual member of the group targeted with whatever discriminatory belief will be around when it is enunciated. And of course, when there is, the hand placed in front of the whispering mouth will be cupped even more tightly than before.
here, my friend Jay Williams - artist and rapper - talks about the role of fear and the unknown on issues of ill-founded hate in this year's presidential campaign.
Other submissions in this series:
-Chris Gibson on whether the election matters
-Dan Evarts' "A Bad Night in Sha'ab"
-Reid Bellon on the symbolism of Obama
-The Nahsville Minx doesn't buy the hype.
-Mom explains her political philosophy
-Teddy Kahn on Dog Sh-t and Competitive Obama-Mania
-S. Thompson on "The Business Party"
-Grandmom's thoughts on how politics play in her world
----
When did "politics as usual" become "hate so casual"?
Senator John McCain, had supporters at his rallies label Barack Obama
as a "terrorist", "socialist" and went so far as to accuse him of
being a "Muslim". Muslim! To insinuate that being a Muslim is somehow
a threat and dangerous is not only insulting, its offensive to every
progressive-minded individual and should not be tolerated. Muslims,
for the most part are peaceful people no different from "us". Its
unfortunate to know as Americans who pride ourselves on diversity and
acceptance, still have to learn what it means to truly accept people
for their differences. Im ashamed that fellow Americans would believe
somehow having a difference in religious practices and culture-
signifies anti-American sentiment. How foolish and ignorant are we?
Have we lost our ability to interpret when fear is being forced upon
us? This fear has spread like a malicious game of "telephone" in the
school yard. Unfairly labeling someone as a "terrorist" and then to
pervert it into tarnishing the Islamic faith is unacceptable.
This fear has spread across all party lines. As one caller into my
favorite progressive talk radio show screamed - "Obama is a Hindu!"
According to her, Hindu tradition leads its followers to destroy and
detest everything American! Again, most Hindu's are peaceful people
without ill intent to anyone, let alone America. Yet, this
mis-information is spread without most news medias and even the
candidates batting an eye. In fact, rather than look directly at this
"Campaign of Fear" and address it, certain candidates would rather
wink at it and wave at their supports knowing the seeds of mistrust
they are planting. Enhanced by post- 9/11 fears, "McCain's army" (I
mean this only for those participating in this campaign of fear. I
have no intention of generalizing an entire group of people as some
people would do so carelessly) has encouraged xenophobia toward anyone
of Arab decent and somehow to include Indians of Hindu faith.
I thought to myself, why not use this platform of running for
President, and political influence to build something bigger than what
seems to be a prolonged ego trip? Why Isn't someone using their
political influence to end this toxic speech at rallies and hate
between other Americans? Why isn't someone really trying to
essentially remove the hyphen from fellow Americans? You know,
Arab-American, African-American, Asian-American. The way to remove
that hyphen is to bring us together and not divide us with the fear
and mistrust. Then I remember looking at each party's convention,
respectively. The RNC was a mostly homogenous group with older and
White participants, the DNC was diverse with all ages, all colors all
there to support a candidate who is trying to bring us together and
not use fear to divide us. A candidate who can run a campaign without
disrespecting groups of people as well as one of the world's most
followed religions. A candidate who can respect all people and include
them in changing a nation into something better.
So, I will be casting my vote for a candidate who's campaign has
echoed far beyond this year's election. Obama has electrified a
movement in America that has young and old alike ready to take action.
He has Black and White, Christian and Muslim ready to build a better
and more perfect union. A better and more perfect America.
Thoughts on the Election: Chris Gibson on whether all this matters
Election eve, people. Two years of complete, unalterable domination of our nation's television and radio airwaves and campaign spending that could have salvaged the economies of numerous small nations have culminated in this - an event like the night before Christmas, if Christmas enraged a solid 40 percent of the country and made the rest act like cocky jerks and allllll the presents were broken toys and dirty, hand-me-down clothes.
And what do we expect?
The cynical expect recounts, voter fraud, voter suppression, and - at worst, they say, violence, regardless of who wins.
Perhaps the optimist expects progress on an enumerated set of policy issues. Perhaps.
or just change. whatever that may mean.
Was it all worth it though?
Let alone the fact that the networks are guaranteed to talk about the 2012 election within days of the result being announced. Hours?
Let alone the fact that - after tomorrow, when the outcome becomes fact - we may actually have to pay attention to one of the numerous global catastrophes occurring right now on our planet, as we run around in circles trying to pretend our differences on health care policy can provide us with some sort of identity.
Does this whole thing really make a difference? Is it not another opiate to distract us from solving the legitimate issues of our economic, cultural, and social problems that simply not be solved through a presidential election?
or is that cynical? hope hope hope hope.
On the one hand, the fact that the networks dedicated a solid year to the issue almost assures me that no, indeed, it does not matter. This has been the latest blockbuster movie or a soap opera with characters with far greater flaws and far more significant character traits.
On the other hand, i would feel awful to write off the efforts of a lot good hearted people on either side of the campaign as totally wrong.
These are nonetheless questions to consider.
Where do we go from here? Why do we go here?
Here is Chris Gibson, a good friend and student of medicine, laying it out as only he can.
Other submissions in this series:
-Dan Evarts' "A Bad Night in Sha'ab"
-Reid Bellon on the symbolism of Obama
-The Nahsville Minx doesn't buy the hype.
-Mom explains her political philosophy
-Teddy Kahn on Dog Sh-t and Competitive Obama-Mania
-S. Thompson on "The Business Party"
-Grandmom's thoughts on how politics play in her world
-----
Two days before the election that we have endlessly been told is the most important in a generation, it is becoming increasingly difficult to say anything about the candidates, the race, or politics in general that has not been said, usually more eloquently, somewhere else. And, curiously, it seems everywhere one turns, the focus of most media is becoming increasingly narrow, as one might imagine a man in the desert would seek to wring the last vestiges of water from a dry sponge. Instead, it seems more appropriate (and easier for me, having no specialized knowledge of voter trends in exurban Virginia or generational politics within the Vietnamese community of Orange County), to step back and ponder the larger picture. As in: what difference can a new president really make, truthfully?
At first glance the answer appears to be: a lot. This is certainly the supposition of the 24-hour news channels, who daily risk giving themselves a brain aneurysm to bring us the latest breathless revelation on what Barack Obama had for his afternoon snack and whether that could represent a new opening for McCain (“he’s stopping at a Taco Bell! He’ll be out of commission for at least two hours!”). It’s now a truism that, well, things ain’t exactly peachy in the broad swath of America. No matter which dichotomy you choose—domestic vs. international, economic vs. cultural, bourgeois vs. proletariat—the shit spans the divide.
And, frankly, a lot of the problem has to do with presidential influence, namely that of our current one. I go back and forth on the relative personal failings implied by overly polemical statements like “George W. Bush is the worst president in United States History,” or analogies such as “like Nero, but with less musical talent.” But the fact remains that we missed two opportunities not to elect a very provincial man with enormous personal flaws, and now we’re paying the price. Leaving aside the unanswerable question of whether the current financial crisis can be mostly blamed on his administration (it probably can’t), it is still pretty much undeniable that many of his military, environmental, educational, and healthcare policies have been disastrous, probably because in large part they’re mostly not policies at all, but a collection of reactionary devices concocted to satisfy a small number of corporate and religious interests. I maintain a staunch belief that either Gore or Kerry would have done a better job, and that in nearly all objective respects, a President Obama would be infinitely preferable to a President McCain—who, by actuarial probabilities, would very likely become a President Palin, and to talk of infinite infinities just gets silly.
But even if the best happens on Tuesday, and Obama manages to successfully navigate the Scylla and Charybdis of undecideds and voter disenfranchisement, how far will that get us? How much better off will we be in four (or, hopefully eight, barring Palin in 2012) years? I have to say that on this question, even I am undecided.
As many have already noted, it may be that the challenges confronting us are just too great for any one administration, no matter how talented, to overcome. It remains to be seen how long or deep the recession that we’re in will last. It remains to be seen whether we will actually be able to pull our troops out of Iraq without plunging the country into civil war, or whether our Sisyphean adventures in Afghanistan will ever resemble anything better than a remake of Groundhog Day in which Bill Murray wakes up every morning to find the Taliban have taken over his apartment building. It remains to be seen whether our educational system will ever be able to retool, or whether we’ll just continue to farm out our R & D to the best and brightest of Southeast Asia. It remains to be seen whether the millions of us without healthcare coverage will get it, or whether we’ll start to reduce our national carbon footprint, or whether any of the other myriad problems with our current state of affairs will be rectified.
But there are deeper, systemic problems with our country and our culture that also certainly contribute to this litany of talking points, yet that almost as certainly will go unaddressed by any president succored by the current establishment. They are likely unsolvable, woven like seams into fabric, such that pulling at them with too much zeal unravels the entire cloth; but without recognizing them and blindly cheering the messianic Obama phenomenon (which, frankly, is sometimes hard not to do), I fear we are setting ourselves up for a bitter national disappointment whose emotional impact may rival that of the disillusionment that has enveloped the Bush years.
Maybe the easiest to spot is the fact that no matter who wins this race, money will still reign supreme. We’ve already seen this come to bear as part of the campaign itself: if Obama pulls out a win, it will be largely on the force of his record-breaking fund-raising. Washington is many things, but no one would ever call it honest; yet even in the most honest of towns, money will still grease the wheels of those who have it. If it can’t buy you direct influence with bribes, it can still buy you air time and ad space and turn opinions in your direction. And even the most principled of lawmakers must still bow to the bottom line some of the time to get money flowing back to their constituents—if they want to get re-elected, that is.
Perhaps this is the second problem, even more insurmountable than the first: the flaws inherent in a representative democracy. In a country as populous and complex as ours, it is inevitable that the few must make decisions for the many, which means that most of us are by necessity left out of the day-to-day decision making process. This is unavoidable: a pure democracy in a nation of several hundred million would be equivalent to anarchy, and the collapse of the Soviet Union and the quiet evolution of China have essentially refuted the ideals of communism, at least as they can be applied at the level of a large state. A better form of government has yet to assert itself. The upside of a representative democracy as we have conceived it, most broadly put, is that our government has managed to function, sometimes thrive, without ever completely falling apart for over two hundred years. I’m not trying to be funny here; a quick survey of other world governments over the same time period shows that this simple fact puts us in pretty elite company. But the downsides are many, and one of the greatest is that, no matter what kind of spin you put on it, a large portion of our potential electorate remains, even now, effectively disenfranchised.
I suspect many would dispute this, arguing that through elections and the judicial system, we are in fact arbiters of our own destiny. But when a particularly pigheaded decision comes out of congress, or our president presses ahead with some particularly egregious action, what real recourse do we have? I suppose we can write letters. Certain lucky localities get to decide small pittances through referenda. And there’s always the next election! But seriously—there are true injustices executed at the hands of our government every single day, and the very system that largely sustains us also prevents us from addressing them. Throw money into the mix (as above), and the disparities only grow greater. As an unelected citizen, I might not have a whole heck of a lot of access to decent remedies, but I still have a fair sight more than a lot of other folks.
The real question here is not what should we search for in place of our current system, but which problems are inevitable and which could be resolved by tweaking a few of the parameters. The money thing is too monstrous to tackle at my kitchen table on a Sunday afternoon. As for access, I think we would all benefit by a bit more crop rotation, by which I mean term limits for legislators, and maybe even for bureaucrats as well. No one ever says they’re setting out to become a career politician, but this is indeed an available vocation for a lucky few, and it shouldn’t be. Two senate terms—twelve years—should be plenty of time for any truly altruistic man or woman to serve the country in the manner he or she envisioned upon first arriving in Washington. Much longer and people get lazy, they lose their skills, they develop a real fear of being jettisoned back out into “the real world” (sad, isn’t it, that this is such an obvious antonym for Washington). They begin making decisions not for the benefit of their constituents, or out of some deeper sense of morality or principle, but for a simple expediency: getting re-elected.
There are other, even deeper problems with the way things are now and the way they probably will be in four or eight years. Some of them have to do with how we see ourselves (read: The Media) and some go beyond perception to the actual substance of ourselves. With the light vanishing outside and more Sunday afternoon errands to run, I’ve run out of time to touch on them all right now.
But the funny thing, if I don’t get a chance to write again before the election, is that I still find myself a little excited amid all my moaning about these inherent flaws. Maybe it’s just being so damn glad to see the waning days of the Bush administration. Maybe without meaning to, I’ve drunk a little bit of the kool-aid and can’t stop myself from imagining what it would be like to be governed by a truly transcendent president. Maybe deep down, I don’t really believe everything I just said, or else I’ve resigned myself to it.
It doesn’t really matter in the end. Before we can fix the enormous, we have to start with the merely huge. Obama ’08.
And what do we expect?
The cynical expect recounts, voter fraud, voter suppression, and - at worst, they say, violence, regardless of who wins.
Perhaps the optimist expects progress on an enumerated set of policy issues. Perhaps.
or just change. whatever that may mean.
Was it all worth it though?
Let alone the fact that the networks are guaranteed to talk about the 2012 election within days of the result being announced. Hours?
Let alone the fact that - after tomorrow, when the outcome becomes fact - we may actually have to pay attention to one of the numerous global catastrophes occurring right now on our planet, as we run around in circles trying to pretend our differences on health care policy can provide us with some sort of identity.
Does this whole thing really make a difference? Is it not another opiate to distract us from solving the legitimate issues of our economic, cultural, and social problems that simply not be solved through a presidential election?
or is that cynical? hope hope hope hope.
On the one hand, the fact that the networks dedicated a solid year to the issue almost assures me that no, indeed, it does not matter. This has been the latest blockbuster movie or a soap opera with characters with far greater flaws and far more significant character traits.
On the other hand, i would feel awful to write off the efforts of a lot good hearted people on either side of the campaign as totally wrong.
These are nonetheless questions to consider.
Where do we go from here? Why do we go here?
Here is Chris Gibson, a good friend and student of medicine, laying it out as only he can.
Other submissions in this series:
-Dan Evarts' "A Bad Night in Sha'ab"
-Reid Bellon on the symbolism of Obama
-The Nahsville Minx doesn't buy the hype.
-Mom explains her political philosophy
-Teddy Kahn on Dog Sh-t and Competitive Obama-Mania
-S. Thompson on "The Business Party"
-Grandmom's thoughts on how politics play in her world
-----
Two days before the election that we have endlessly been told is the most important in a generation, it is becoming increasingly difficult to say anything about the candidates, the race, or politics in general that has not been said, usually more eloquently, somewhere else. And, curiously, it seems everywhere one turns, the focus of most media is becoming increasingly narrow, as one might imagine a man in the desert would seek to wring the last vestiges of water from a dry sponge. Instead, it seems more appropriate (and easier for me, having no specialized knowledge of voter trends in exurban Virginia or generational politics within the Vietnamese community of Orange County), to step back and ponder the larger picture. As in: what difference can a new president really make, truthfully?
At first glance the answer appears to be: a lot. This is certainly the supposition of the 24-hour news channels, who daily risk giving themselves a brain aneurysm to bring us the latest breathless revelation on what Barack Obama had for his afternoon snack and whether that could represent a new opening for McCain (“he’s stopping at a Taco Bell! He’ll be out of commission for at least two hours!”). It’s now a truism that, well, things ain’t exactly peachy in the broad swath of America. No matter which dichotomy you choose—domestic vs. international, economic vs. cultural, bourgeois vs. proletariat—the shit spans the divide.
And, frankly, a lot of the problem has to do with presidential influence, namely that of our current one. I go back and forth on the relative personal failings implied by overly polemical statements like “George W. Bush is the worst president in United States History,” or analogies such as “like Nero, but with less musical talent.” But the fact remains that we missed two opportunities not to elect a very provincial man with enormous personal flaws, and now we’re paying the price. Leaving aside the unanswerable question of whether the current financial crisis can be mostly blamed on his administration (it probably can’t), it is still pretty much undeniable that many of his military, environmental, educational, and healthcare policies have been disastrous, probably because in large part they’re mostly not policies at all, but a collection of reactionary devices concocted to satisfy a small number of corporate and religious interests. I maintain a staunch belief that either Gore or Kerry would have done a better job, and that in nearly all objective respects, a President Obama would be infinitely preferable to a President McCain—who, by actuarial probabilities, would very likely become a President Palin, and to talk of infinite infinities just gets silly.
But even if the best happens on Tuesday, and Obama manages to successfully navigate the Scylla and Charybdis of undecideds and voter disenfranchisement, how far will that get us? How much better off will we be in four (or, hopefully eight, barring Palin in 2012) years? I have to say that on this question, even I am undecided.
As many have already noted, it may be that the challenges confronting us are just too great for any one administration, no matter how talented, to overcome. It remains to be seen how long or deep the recession that we’re in will last. It remains to be seen whether we will actually be able to pull our troops out of Iraq without plunging the country into civil war, or whether our Sisyphean adventures in Afghanistan will ever resemble anything better than a remake of Groundhog Day in which Bill Murray wakes up every morning to find the Taliban have taken over his apartment building. It remains to be seen whether our educational system will ever be able to retool, or whether we’ll just continue to farm out our R & D to the best and brightest of Southeast Asia. It remains to be seen whether the millions of us without healthcare coverage will get it, or whether we’ll start to reduce our national carbon footprint, or whether any of the other myriad problems with our current state of affairs will be rectified.
But there are deeper, systemic problems with our country and our culture that also certainly contribute to this litany of talking points, yet that almost as certainly will go unaddressed by any president succored by the current establishment. They are likely unsolvable, woven like seams into fabric, such that pulling at them with too much zeal unravels the entire cloth; but without recognizing them and blindly cheering the messianic Obama phenomenon (which, frankly, is sometimes hard not to do), I fear we are setting ourselves up for a bitter national disappointment whose emotional impact may rival that of the disillusionment that has enveloped the Bush years.
Maybe the easiest to spot is the fact that no matter who wins this race, money will still reign supreme. We’ve already seen this come to bear as part of the campaign itself: if Obama pulls out a win, it will be largely on the force of his record-breaking fund-raising. Washington is many things, but no one would ever call it honest; yet even in the most honest of towns, money will still grease the wheels of those who have it. If it can’t buy you direct influence with bribes, it can still buy you air time and ad space and turn opinions in your direction. And even the most principled of lawmakers must still bow to the bottom line some of the time to get money flowing back to their constituents—if they want to get re-elected, that is.
Perhaps this is the second problem, even more insurmountable than the first: the flaws inherent in a representative democracy. In a country as populous and complex as ours, it is inevitable that the few must make decisions for the many, which means that most of us are by necessity left out of the day-to-day decision making process. This is unavoidable: a pure democracy in a nation of several hundred million would be equivalent to anarchy, and the collapse of the Soviet Union and the quiet evolution of China have essentially refuted the ideals of communism, at least as they can be applied at the level of a large state. A better form of government has yet to assert itself. The upside of a representative democracy as we have conceived it, most broadly put, is that our government has managed to function, sometimes thrive, without ever completely falling apart for over two hundred years. I’m not trying to be funny here; a quick survey of other world governments over the same time period shows that this simple fact puts us in pretty elite company. But the downsides are many, and one of the greatest is that, no matter what kind of spin you put on it, a large portion of our potential electorate remains, even now, effectively disenfranchised.
I suspect many would dispute this, arguing that through elections and the judicial system, we are in fact arbiters of our own destiny. But when a particularly pigheaded decision comes out of congress, or our president presses ahead with some particularly egregious action, what real recourse do we have? I suppose we can write letters. Certain lucky localities get to decide small pittances through referenda. And there’s always the next election! But seriously—there are true injustices executed at the hands of our government every single day, and the very system that largely sustains us also prevents us from addressing them. Throw money into the mix (as above), and the disparities only grow greater. As an unelected citizen, I might not have a whole heck of a lot of access to decent remedies, but I still have a fair sight more than a lot of other folks.
The real question here is not what should we search for in place of our current system, but which problems are inevitable and which could be resolved by tweaking a few of the parameters. The money thing is too monstrous to tackle at my kitchen table on a Sunday afternoon. As for access, I think we would all benefit by a bit more crop rotation, by which I mean term limits for legislators, and maybe even for bureaucrats as well. No one ever says they’re setting out to become a career politician, but this is indeed an available vocation for a lucky few, and it shouldn’t be. Two senate terms—twelve years—should be plenty of time for any truly altruistic man or woman to serve the country in the manner he or she envisioned upon first arriving in Washington. Much longer and people get lazy, they lose their skills, they develop a real fear of being jettisoned back out into “the real world” (sad, isn’t it, that this is such an obvious antonym for Washington). They begin making decisions not for the benefit of their constituents, or out of some deeper sense of morality or principle, but for a simple expediency: getting re-elected.
There are other, even deeper problems with the way things are now and the way they probably will be in four or eight years. Some of them have to do with how we see ourselves (read: The Media) and some go beyond perception to the actual substance of ourselves. With the light vanishing outside and more Sunday afternoon errands to run, I’ve run out of time to touch on them all right now.
But the funny thing, if I don’t get a chance to write again before the election, is that I still find myself a little excited amid all my moaning about these inherent flaws. Maybe it’s just being so damn glad to see the waning days of the Bush administration. Maybe without meaning to, I’ve drunk a little bit of the kool-aid and can’t stop myself from imagining what it would be like to be governed by a truly transcendent president. Maybe deep down, I don’t really believe everything I just said, or else I’ve resigned myself to it.
It doesn’t really matter in the end. Before we can fix the enormous, we have to start with the merely huge. Obama ’08.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Thoughts on the election: Dan Evarts' "A Bad Night in Sha'ab"
From what I understand, this was originally written as part of a Halloween story contest, but given that the election is just days away, I think it is particularly relevant considering the context and tone.
Oftentimes, what authors of fiction choose to write about is a decision fitting into the broadest definition of "political," or what is important to them. In this case, I think that is clear and further punctuated with a punch line.
Its certainly harder to write introductions to fiction than it is non-fiction, as I don't want to skew any interpretations so I may be better off saying...
The author is a law student and general expert on everything you overlook. In all the time I have known him I would never surely say I could knew where exactly he stands on politics, and that is probably a good thing. I wouldn't even pretend to know after reading this story, where he puts his knowledge to use in crafting a fine piece about some of the unforseen challenges of combat in Iraq.
Other submissions in this series:
-Reid Bellon on the symbolism of Obama
-The Nahsville Minx doesn't buy the hype.
-Mom explains her political philosophy
-Teddy Kahn on Dog Sh-t and Competitive Obama-Mania
-S. Thompson on "The Business Party"
-Grandmom's thoughts on how politics play in her world
----
We were the ready squad when the call came in. Just sitting there playing Madden in our Dragonskin, no clue what was about to go down. No clue. Garcia had just scored on Boyle - he was all up in his face giving him double birds when Sgt. Chilton came in and told us to cut out the bromance and move out and he meant move.
We loaded up and gunned it out of the Green Zone with the sunset at our backs, rolling out as fast as an uparmored Hummer loaded down with guys in battle rattle can roll, which honestly isn't as much as you'd like when you're RPG bait heading towards Sadr City. We were crammed in there, though, six of us in the back and one up top on the fifty-cal. Chilton was turned around over the front seat screaming the situation at us over Chamillionaire. Another squad and some contractors had run into trouble babysitting a National Police company on a sweep through these warehouses and we were going to bail them out. Heavies were on the way, but those guys in there needed help pronto.
This is my second tour. I've been over here a while, and Baghdad ain't Disneyland, that's for damn sure. Not all that many smiling faces. They say violence is down; we get pep talks every day, the surge and everything, but it was different that night. I mean, you roar down the streets in a Hummer like an armor-plated pitbull with Ma Deuce or Mk19 staring everybody in the face, hell yeah, people get scared. I've never seen fear like I did then, though. The locals were freaking out, and I mean freaking out, running all over the place or just standing around doing that weird Arab throat thing. Spooky.
About a klick from the target we started to see dudes in NP uniforms booking it, bugging out of there. A couple still had AKs, most looked like they had just dropped everything and started running. Chilton yelled at a few, but everybody was just screaming something Muslim, some Arabic word over and over again. If those guys knew any English they were too scared to remember it.
We were all flipping out at this point. You always get nervous outside the wire, but we'd never seen anything like this before. Garcia was just sitting there chilling. In the sandbox since '03. Maybe he was crazy before, I don't know. He was certified now. He always said he looked like a Latino Tom Cruise and tried to get us to call him Maverick. He slid his Oakleys down his nose and winked at us. We told him to go to hell.
There was nothing at the warehouse. Simmons punched the door down with an M100 and we went in ready to blaze. Nothing. Not even a sound, just darkness. We flipped down our NVGs and started to clear the place, room by room.
Bergbauer, Helprin and I found the bodies, or what was left of them. Four with Ranger tabs and two guys in unmarked non-issue BDUs. Guns - shotguns - and spent shells all over the place. Dead tangos all over the place too, maybe dead for weeks. They were in rough shape. Guts are guts, even when you're looking at them in night vision green. It doesn't hit you as hard, but it still hits you.
We were checking them out when someone starts rock and rolling down the hall. We run towards the shots and see about 20 terrorists or insurgents or whatever on top of Chilton and Garcia. Chilton's already down, angeled. Garcia's trying to drag him out and blasting them point-blank but they're not stopping. No sign of Simmons or Roy. Garcia goes dry - he's slapping a fresh mag into his M-4 when one of them takes a swipe at him and his head goes flying clean off. Still in the helmet. Helprin starts puking.
Then they turn towards us. Bergbauer and I unload on them and it's like they don't care. Whatever their deal is, 5.56 isn't going to stop them. They're not even flinching when they're hit.
Over all this we hear the big gun go off outside. Berg and I decide it's time to bounce fast, so we grab Helprin and pull him out into the street. Boyle's on top of the Hummer spraying a crowd of corpsed-up-looking mujs with the 50. They're falling to pieces or exploding for the most part, but they're still coming, dragging themselves towards the Hummer even when they get their legs blown off. Miller sees us and sticks his head out the window yelling that a Bone's incoming and it's going to smoke the place whether we're there or not.
I don't know how we made it into the Hummer, but we did, and it took off, Boyle still hosing down everything in sight. Then the world came apart. I've seen a JDAM hit before, and what they do to places, but they must have given this warehouse about 10 of them. We were maybe 500 meters away when it went up, and a chunk of concrete flew out and put a dent in the Hummer's armor. That's when I started puking too.
So what happened out there? I'll get back to ya on that. Helprin says the CIA was working on some secret chemical to interrogate dead hajis with, tag 'em, bag 'em and ask 'em, buried the funding in earmarks for some snowmobile track to nowhere out in Alaska, and that it got into the water supply somehow. Says he saw it on Wikileaks. Berg says they get so fired up with jihad spirit over here that they probably don't even notice when they get zapped by a Predator or something. I don't know, don't wanna know. Hope I never find out.
All I know is that I want to go home. Another hundred years of this? No thanks.
Oftentimes, what authors of fiction choose to write about is a decision fitting into the broadest definition of "political," or what is important to them. In this case, I think that is clear and further punctuated with a punch line.
Its certainly harder to write introductions to fiction than it is non-fiction, as I don't want to skew any interpretations so I may be better off saying...
The author is a law student and general expert on everything you overlook. In all the time I have known him I would never surely say I could knew where exactly he stands on politics, and that is probably a good thing. I wouldn't even pretend to know after reading this story, where he puts his knowledge to use in crafting a fine piece about some of the unforseen challenges of combat in Iraq.
Other submissions in this series:
-Reid Bellon on the symbolism of Obama
-The Nahsville Minx doesn't buy the hype.
-Mom explains her political philosophy
-Teddy Kahn on Dog Sh-t and Competitive Obama-Mania
-S. Thompson on "The Business Party"
-Grandmom's thoughts on how politics play in her world
----
We were the ready squad when the call came in. Just sitting there playing Madden in our Dragonskin, no clue what was about to go down. No clue. Garcia had just scored on Boyle - he was all up in his face giving him double birds when Sgt. Chilton came in and told us to cut out the bromance and move out and he meant move.
We loaded up and gunned it out of the Green Zone with the sunset at our backs, rolling out as fast as an uparmored Hummer loaded down with guys in battle rattle can roll, which honestly isn't as much as you'd like when you're RPG bait heading towards Sadr City. We were crammed in there, though, six of us in the back and one up top on the fifty-cal. Chilton was turned around over the front seat screaming the situation at us over Chamillionaire. Another squad and some contractors had run into trouble babysitting a National Police company on a sweep through these warehouses and we were going to bail them out. Heavies were on the way, but those guys in there needed help pronto.
This is my second tour. I've been over here a while, and Baghdad ain't Disneyland, that's for damn sure. Not all that many smiling faces. They say violence is down; we get pep talks every day, the surge and everything, but it was different that night. I mean, you roar down the streets in a Hummer like an armor-plated pitbull with Ma Deuce or Mk19 staring everybody in the face, hell yeah, people get scared. I've never seen fear like I did then, though. The locals were freaking out, and I mean freaking out, running all over the place or just standing around doing that weird Arab throat thing. Spooky.
About a klick from the target we started to see dudes in NP uniforms booking it, bugging out of there. A couple still had AKs, most looked like they had just dropped everything and started running. Chilton yelled at a few, but everybody was just screaming something Muslim, some Arabic word over and over again. If those guys knew any English they were too scared to remember it.
We were all flipping out at this point. You always get nervous outside the wire, but we'd never seen anything like this before. Garcia was just sitting there chilling. In the sandbox since '03. Maybe he was crazy before, I don't know. He was certified now. He always said he looked like a Latino Tom Cruise and tried to get us to call him Maverick. He slid his Oakleys down his nose and winked at us. We told him to go to hell.
There was nothing at the warehouse. Simmons punched the door down with an M100 and we went in ready to blaze. Nothing. Not even a sound, just darkness. We flipped down our NVGs and started to clear the place, room by room.
Bergbauer, Helprin and I found the bodies, or what was left of them. Four with Ranger tabs and two guys in unmarked non-issue BDUs. Guns - shotguns - and spent shells all over the place. Dead tangos all over the place too, maybe dead for weeks. They were in rough shape. Guts are guts, even when you're looking at them in night vision green. It doesn't hit you as hard, but it still hits you.
We were checking them out when someone starts rock and rolling down the hall. We run towards the shots and see about 20 terrorists or insurgents or whatever on top of Chilton and Garcia. Chilton's already down, angeled. Garcia's trying to drag him out and blasting them point-blank but they're not stopping. No sign of Simmons or Roy. Garcia goes dry - he's slapping a fresh mag into his M-4 when one of them takes a swipe at him and his head goes flying clean off. Still in the helmet. Helprin starts puking.
Then they turn towards us. Bergbauer and I unload on them and it's like they don't care. Whatever their deal is, 5.56 isn't going to stop them. They're not even flinching when they're hit.
Over all this we hear the big gun go off outside. Berg and I decide it's time to bounce fast, so we grab Helprin and pull him out into the street. Boyle's on top of the Hummer spraying a crowd of corpsed-up-looking mujs with the 50. They're falling to pieces or exploding for the most part, but they're still coming, dragging themselves towards the Hummer even when they get their legs blown off. Miller sees us and sticks his head out the window yelling that a Bone's incoming and it's going to smoke the place whether we're there or not.
I don't know how we made it into the Hummer, but we did, and it took off, Boyle still hosing down everything in sight. Then the world came apart. I've seen a JDAM hit before, and what they do to places, but they must have given this warehouse about 10 of them. We were maybe 500 meters away when it went up, and a chunk of concrete flew out and put a dent in the Hummer's armor. That's when I started puking too.
So what happened out there? I'll get back to ya on that. Helprin says the CIA was working on some secret chemical to interrogate dead hajis with, tag 'em, bag 'em and ask 'em, buried the funding in earmarks for some snowmobile track to nowhere out in Alaska, and that it got into the water supply somehow. Says he saw it on Wikileaks. Berg says they get so fired up with jihad spirit over here that they probably don't even notice when they get zapped by a Predator or something. I don't know, don't wanna know. Hope I never find out.
All I know is that I want to go home. Another hundred years of this? No thanks.
Thoughts on the election: Reid Bellon on the symbolism of Obama
While the subject is debated hotly in the pages of magazines and on television screens, it is undeniable that this election holds a great deal of significance to people who are often left nearly voiceless in the political process - whether it be the often-ignored rural voter angered at a politician's off-handed stereotyping or the urban voter upset at being exploited for years by politicians making promises and never coming through.
These individuals usually are in the groups political analysts tend to talk about, but never talk to - as if their instincts are so easily understandable that they can be accounted for in sweeping generalizations or with the most basic political calculations. For these analysts, the historically low voter turnout among these groups is often interpreted as apathy, rather than frustration with a system that overlooks and ignores.
And these groups are far larger in size than we can imagine.
Here, in our newest submission, Reid Bellon talks about the moment something about this election clicked with him - when he stumbled upon the sentiments of those typically not mobilized by politics in an atypical election year.
Reid is a 27 year old who lives in an area in Georgia that used to be called rural, but now is called "the atlanta suburbs." He works for a local television station where he often covers county and local politics.
Other submissions in this series:
-The Nahsville Minx doesn't buy the hype.
-Mom explains her political philosophy
-Teddy Kahn on Dog Sh-t and Competitive Obama-Mania
-S. Thompson on "The Business Party"
-Grandmom's thoughts on how politics play in her world
----
Before the Bush years, I was always very interested and active in politics. All of that changed after the election of 2000. After that election, I became very disheartened by the political process of our country and I lost my faith in the people running for office. To me it just seemed like all politicians were just out to benefit themselves, like they had no respect for me or the American people. I felt they would say whatever sound bite, one liner, or campaign promise they could if they thought I wanted to hear it.
The election of 2004 did little to change my feelings of apathy; I continued to be disheartened and showed a lack of interest.
By the time the 2008 election began to gear up, few of my feelings had changed. Yes it was interesting that we had a female candidate and an African American candidate, but I still took only a light interest in it all. To me it was just a lot of the same, the same old promises, the same old one liner and same old candidates, people looking mostly for personal benefit rather than a stronger country.
But that all changed on a trip to Louisville, Kentucky in June of 2008.
I decided to visit two friends in Louisville. At that point in time, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were still in a heated fight for the democratic nomination. Yet with every passing day, it was becoming increasingly clearer that Barack Obama would take the nomination. During our trip to Kentucky we took many drives through West Louisville, a neighborhood that is prominently African American in population.
While we drove down the streets of that neighborhood we saw abandoned buildings, neighborhoods that would be considered ghettos and people living in poverty. But we also saw something else; we saw Barack Obama posters in every window, Barack Obama bumper stickers on every car, bike and scooter as well Barack Obama T-shirts being sold at small kiosks on street corners. It seemed everyone with a Barack Obama sign, bumper sticker or T shirt was also smiling and had almost a quiet confidence to them. I realized then that Barack Obama wasn’t just another candidate. He represents more than just the Democratic Party, he is a symbol. Barack Obama is a symbol much like Martin Luther King is, a symbol much like Gandhi is, a symbol much like America used to be - he is a symbol for hope.
Just the name and likeness of Obama gave these people hope for change, it gave them hope that better times were ahead in America and that this country was ready for it. His likeness shows that America, after years of struggle, racism and conflict, has finally matured enough to put its petty difference aside and unite behind a man and a symbol. The words “anybody can make it in America” used to be just a cliché to a lot of people, including me. Yet the rise of Barack Obama has shown that America is changing, and he is living proof those words are true.
The residents of West Louisville still had faith in America - maybe I should too.
I will be honest with you, I’m still not the most involved political person that I could be, and I’m still very skeptical of every politician and what they promise. But I do know that America deserves better than what it’s had the last 8 years. I think Barack Obama can get us there and to me he represents what is still great about this country. The rise of Barack Obama is a historic event, and I’m blessed to be witness to it.
These individuals usually are in the groups political analysts tend to talk about, but never talk to - as if their instincts are so easily understandable that they can be accounted for in sweeping generalizations or with the most basic political calculations. For these analysts, the historically low voter turnout among these groups is often interpreted as apathy, rather than frustration with a system that overlooks and ignores.
And these groups are far larger in size than we can imagine.
Here, in our newest submission, Reid Bellon talks about the moment something about this election clicked with him - when he stumbled upon the sentiments of those typically not mobilized by politics in an atypical election year.
Reid is a 27 year old who lives in an area in Georgia that used to be called rural, but now is called "the atlanta suburbs." He works for a local television station where he often covers county and local politics.
Other submissions in this series:
-The Nahsville Minx doesn't buy the hype.
-Mom explains her political philosophy
-Teddy Kahn on Dog Sh-t and Competitive Obama-Mania
-S. Thompson on "The Business Party"
-Grandmom's thoughts on how politics play in her world
----
Before the Bush years, I was always very interested and active in politics. All of that changed after the election of 2000. After that election, I became very disheartened by the political process of our country and I lost my faith in the people running for office. To me it just seemed like all politicians were just out to benefit themselves, like they had no respect for me or the American people. I felt they would say whatever sound bite, one liner, or campaign promise they could if they thought I wanted to hear it.
The election of 2004 did little to change my feelings of apathy; I continued to be disheartened and showed a lack of interest.
By the time the 2008 election began to gear up, few of my feelings had changed. Yes it was interesting that we had a female candidate and an African American candidate, but I still took only a light interest in it all. To me it was just a lot of the same, the same old promises, the same old one liner and same old candidates, people looking mostly for personal benefit rather than a stronger country.
But that all changed on a trip to Louisville, Kentucky in June of 2008.
I decided to visit two friends in Louisville. At that point in time, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were still in a heated fight for the democratic nomination. Yet with every passing day, it was becoming increasingly clearer that Barack Obama would take the nomination. During our trip to Kentucky we took many drives through West Louisville, a neighborhood that is prominently African American in population.
While we drove down the streets of that neighborhood we saw abandoned buildings, neighborhoods that would be considered ghettos and people living in poverty. But we also saw something else; we saw Barack Obama posters in every window, Barack Obama bumper stickers on every car, bike and scooter as well Barack Obama T-shirts being sold at small kiosks on street corners. It seemed everyone with a Barack Obama sign, bumper sticker or T shirt was also smiling and had almost a quiet confidence to them. I realized then that Barack Obama wasn’t just another candidate. He represents more than just the Democratic Party, he is a symbol. Barack Obama is a symbol much like Martin Luther King is, a symbol much like Gandhi is, a symbol much like America used to be - he is a symbol for hope.
Just the name and likeness of Obama gave these people hope for change, it gave them hope that better times were ahead in America and that this country was ready for it. His likeness shows that America, after years of struggle, racism and conflict, has finally matured enough to put its petty difference aside and unite behind a man and a symbol. The words “anybody can make it in America” used to be just a cliché to a lot of people, including me. Yet the rise of Barack Obama has shown that America is changing, and he is living proof those words are true.
The residents of West Louisville still had faith in America - maybe I should too.
I will be honest with you, I’m still not the most involved political person that I could be, and I’m still very skeptical of every politician and what they promise. But I do know that America deserves better than what it’s had the last 8 years. I think Barack Obama can get us there and to me he represents what is still great about this country. The rise of Barack Obama is a historic event, and I’m blessed to be witness to it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)